Anti-measles vaccine backlash: central Pa. opponent holds her ground, but fears loss of choice, more government control

In this Thursday, Jan. 29, 2015 photo, a pediatrician holds a dose of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine at his practice in Northridge, Calif. Vaccinations can cause minor side effects including redness at the injection site and sometimes mild fever, but medical experts say serious complications are rare and much less dangerous than the diseases that vaccines prevent. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)

(Damian Dovarganes)

Alison Mullins has a college degree in math. Her husband is a lawyer. Don't tell her she is incapable of effective research, or understanding numbers and statistical risks. Don't tell her she must accept a vaccine because someone else believes the benefit outweighs the risk.

Her son, who received only one childhood vaccine, is grown. The Cumberland County resident has lost touch with the network of people who share her grave concerns about vaccines.

Alison Mullins (provided)

But the measles outbreak and raging debate about vaccine is pulling her back. She sees people like her who opt out of vaccination being portrayed as idiots. She's alarmed by new proposals to limit their right to refuse.

"This has spurred me to be a little bit more involved," she says. "If I can help someone, I have to be willing to put myself out there, and maybe be a social pariah."

A vast majority of doctors say the safety and benefits of vaccines are proven beyond a doubt, and the debate is over.

Mullins, however, says the most relevant debate is about freedom, and the rights of Americans to make their own medical decisions. Will Americans soon be required to be vaccinated against certain illnesses to hold their job? Will the the government someday mandate Ebola vaccine?

Two decades ago, Mullins says, she approached parenthood with the idea her child would get the recommended vaccines.

Living in Virginia, she attended a natural child birth class conducted by an aeronautical engineer. At his suggestion, she saw a film which raised vaccine concerns. She wasn't immediately swayed by the film, or others in the audience. "They were a little more granola than I was ... I just realized I needed to do more research before we went forward," she says.

Over time, she and her husband conducted a "risk-benefit" analysis for each vaccine. They wound up rejecting all vaccines except the one that protects against tetanus.

They lived in Texas when her son was a pre-schooler. When a child in their circle got chickenpox, Mullins and some other parents deliberately exposed their unvaccinated children. Her son recovered easily from chickenpox, she says.

Mullins reasoned that most of the illnesses vaccines project against, including small pox, are rare or non-existent in the United States, and therefore the risk is low. She trusts a healthy immune system, and things such as a healthy diet, to provide sufficient protection.

She admits she was worried when her son came down with whooping cough, a severe respiratory illness. But he recovered, and Mullins says it didn't change her position concerning vaccines.

Neither does the current debate, which follows the measles outbreak which began in California and which has sickened more than 120 people in 17 states, including a child in Cumberland County.

It concluded, "We found evidence that some vaccines are associated with serious [adverse events); however, these events are extremely rare and must be weighed against the protective benefits that vaccines provide."

Is also said, "There is strong evidence that [measles, mumps, rubella] vaccine is not associated with autism."

Mullins views the shield against lawsuits as the loss of a needed check against faulty products.

Her confidence is further undermined by the ongoing whistleblower lawsuit in which two researchers allege their former employer, vaccine manufacturer Merck, manipulated data to make it seem the mumps portion of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine is more effective than it actually is. Merck has an exclusive license to produce the vaccine, but needs to prove a high rate of effectiveness.

Doctors, meanwhile, admit vaccines aren't perfect, and serious side effects happen in rare cases. But they say the risks posed by the diseases they protect against are far higher. There's widespread agreement that vaccines are the greatest public health achievement.

Doctors also say it can be an uphill struggle to convince people of the importance and relative safety of vaccines in an era when, because of the success of vaccines, most parents have never seen the illnesses that once commonly caused death and disability.

Prior to 1963, for example, measles killed 400 to 500 people annually in the United States. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, pneumonia is a fairly common side effect of measles, and about one in 1,000 measles patients develop encephalitis, a swelling of the brain which can cause intellectual disabilities. A measles outbreak in 1989-91 killed 123 people and hospitalized thousands.

On the other hand, the most serious possible side effect of measles vaccine, doctors say, is a severe, life-threatening but treatable allergic reaction, which happens in about one in one million cases.

Many doctors also stress that it's an emotional subject, with high potential for miscommunication and misinformation, and that it can be hard for people to grasp the statistics concerning risks versus benefits.

For example, Dr. Rachel Levine, Pennsylvania's acting physician general, recently explained that serious conditions such as autism will always occur. In a country were 95 percent of children get vaccinated, it's inevitable some, due to chance, will come down with an illness around the time of vaccination. That doesn't prove a connection, although Levine said she understands how someone whose child is stricken can believe there is. Doctors must do a better job of talking to parents about vaccine, she says.

For her part, Mullins bristles at anyone, especially the government, telling her what risks are acceptable. "It's easy for a physician to say it's worth the risk. But if your child is the one who is killed or severely impacted, your risk is 100 percent. Who is to say your child is the necessary sacrifice for the greater good?," she says.

The current debate over vaccines is giving voice to parents and doctors who argue parents who choose not to vaccinate also choose to jeopardize the health of all children. That's because vaccines aren't 100 percent effective, meaning some children who are vaccinated will get sick if exposed, especially to measles, possibly the most contagious disease. They can be contagious before it's known they are sick. They pose a special danger to children who can't be vaccinated because of medical reasons, or are too young.

What does Mullins say to that?

She pauses, then explains it's hard to answer without seeming uncaring.

"Which life matters more? Where do we draw the line?," she says. "If I had a child who had a compromised immune system, I guess my momma bear would come out in the strongest way. But to ask me to inject my child with formaldehyde and mercury and aluminum and bypass their natural defense system ... I don't see that."

Years ago in Texas, Mullins had trouble finding a pediatrician willing to accept her unvaccinated child. In Pennsylvania, it wasn't so hard, and she had only one unpleasant interaction with a doctor, who she says backed off after she made clear her knowledge and feelings.

Dr. Gregory Poland of the Mayo Clinic and a leading vaccine researcher, recently told Forbes, "I don't think my patients who reject vaccines are nuts. They have come to a conclusion -- I believe their conclusion is in error -- but they have come to the conclusion that the vaccine is not good. I've yet to meet a parent who doesn't want to do the very best for their child, including vaccines."

Mullins says, "I pray the truth will get out there."

Editor's note: This story was updated to correct a reference to Acting Pennsylvania Physician General Rachel Levine.